UK Defence Forum

News, History, Discussions and Debates on UK Defence.

Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
Ron5
Senior Member
Posts: 3251
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
Location: United States of America

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby Ron5 » 15 Oct 2018, 20:52

Enigmatically wrote:
Ron5 wrote:

Twin Islands is a solution for having two large gas turbines located apart from each other. It has zero other merits and many demerits.

That was why it was first thought of. But it is not its only advantage. Far from it

Ron5 wrote:


SRVL re-introduces to the the RN the bolter or "go around".

No it doesn't. This is not like an arrestor laning


1. So try and list a couple. You'll be stretching because there aren't any. Takes away deck space for no gain.

2. Bollox. Go read what the landing office said.

Ron5
Senior Member
Posts: 3251
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
Location: United States of America

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby Ron5 » 15 Oct 2018, 20:59

Bring Deeps wrote:SRVL, is an innovation and military history of full of ones that changed warfare for ever. It is too early to assess how significant this one will be but it might be unwise to assume that the epitome of carrier based aviation will always be cats and traps. In any event isn't the F35 clever enough to land itself? I thought most aircraft accidents these days were due to pilot error.


The Brits are going overboard on SRVL as if it's the most significant invention since since sliced bread. It isn't, rolling landings without arrestor cables have been done since carriers were first invented. I can only assume it's because there's damn all UK invention in the F-35B for the fanboi's to get excited about.

Next I expect some bright RN spark will suggest attaching a hook to the B and having a cable stretched across the deck to make rolling landings safer and a big safety net in case it doesn't work.

S M H
Member
Posts: 330
Joined: 03 May 2015, 12:59
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby S M H » 15 Oct 2018, 21:11

The S.R.V.L. came about because of the amount of ordinance jettisoned by returning Harriers to clear max landing weights. This bedevilled the harriers in warm climates . I watched a Russia carrier recovery on Novorossiyk (137) which the aircraft recovery used a S.R.V.L. profile landing. According to the American working passenger we had it. Said the Soviet navy used it because vertical landings curtailed lift engines hours. They had a barrier on the flight deck on one surveillance run.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 8001
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 15 Oct 2018, 21:24

There is something to be said (my post on the F-35 thread) about the 5% more thrust on hover (landing) and hence the weapons ' bring-back' problem will occur far less frequently.

Scimitar54
Member
Posts: 134
Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby Scimitar54 » 15 Oct 2018, 22:00

Ron5 wrote:-
Next I expect some bright RN spark will suggest attaching a hook to the B and having a cable stretched across the deck to make rolling landings safer and a big safety net in case it doesn't work.


Maybe with an angled deck to keep the incoming "bolter" at a safer distance from the parked aircraft!!!

Bring Deeps
Member
Posts: 90
Joined: 27 May 2015, 21:06
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby Bring Deeps » 15 Oct 2018, 22:19

'Nothing remains static in war or military weapons, and it is consequently often dangerous to rely on courses suggested by apparent similarities in the past.' Admiral Ernest King.

Little J
Member
Posts: 484
Joined: 02 May 2015, 14:35
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby Little J » 15 Oct 2018, 22:35

Ron5 wrote:
Enigmatically wrote:
Ron5 wrote:

Twin Islands is a solution for having two large gas turbines located apart from each other. It has zero other merits and many demerits.

That was why it was first thought of. But it is not its only advantage. Far from it

Ron5 wrote:


SRVL re-introduces to the the RN the bolter or "go around".

No it doesn't. This is not like an arrestor laning


1. So try and list a couple. You'll be stretching because there aren't any. Takes away deck space for no gain.

2. Bollox. Go read what the landing office said.


Sorry, I've been at work and had what little brain I had drip out of my ears...
How do you have a "bolter" on an aircraft travelling at around 30-40 mph? What am I missing?

R686
Senior Member
Posts: 1562
Joined: 28 May 2015, 02:43
Location: Australia

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby R686 » 15 Oct 2018, 22:39

Little J wrote:
Ron5 wrote:
Enigmatically wrote:
Ron5 wrote:

Twin Islands is a solution for having two large gas turbines located apart from each other. It has zero other merits and many demerits.

That was why it was first thought of. But it is not its only advantage. Far from it

Ron5 wrote:


SRVL re-introduces to the the RN the bolter or "go around".

No it doesn't. This is not like an arrestor laning


1. So try and list a couple. You'll be stretching because there aren't any. Takes away deck space for no gain.

2. Bollox. Go read what the landing office said.




Sorry, I've been at work and had what little brain I had drip out of my ears...
How do you have a "bolter" on an aircraft travelling at around 30-40 mph? What am I missing?



No brakes can’t stop planes keeps rolling forward unless it has reverse thrusters

Scimitar54
Member
Posts: 134
Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby Scimitar54 » 15 Oct 2018, 23:04

Little J wrote:-
How do you have a "bolter" on an aircraft travelling at around 30-40 mph? What am I missing?


I think that you will find that it is more likely to be double that!!!

R686
Senior Member
Posts: 1562
Joined: 28 May 2015, 02:43
Location: Australia

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby R686 » 15 Oct 2018, 23:45

Testing on board the carrier was done at 40 kn which is 46 mile an hour but that is a relatively light aircraft

Little J
Member
Posts: 484
Joined: 02 May 2015, 14:35
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby Little J » 15 Oct 2018, 23:49

Scimitar54 wrote:I think that you will find that it is more likely to be double that!!!


OK have to admit, I guessed the speed. But I've just watched a simulator demo of it landing SRVL at 58 knots, so if the ship is travelling at say 15 knots, I wasn't that far off the closing speed :D
So I still don't think it is going to be in danger of falling off the ski ramp... :shifty:
R686 wrote:No brakes can’t stop planes keeps rolling forward unless it has reverse thrusters

It has flown at 30 knots backwards, I imagine that would help slow it down if the pilot finds the brakes failed...

Scimitar54
Member
Posts: 134
Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby Scimitar54 » 16 Oct 2018, 00:02

They will not be closing on each other, the aircraft will need to be travelling 30-40mph faster (relative to the Carrier) and if the carrier is "underway" at say 20-25 Knots, then I think my figure is more likely to be closer to the mark.

R686
Senior Member
Posts: 1562
Joined: 28 May 2015, 02:43
Location: Australia

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby R686 » 16 Oct 2018, 00:04

Little J wrote:
R686 wrote:No brakes can’t stop planes keeps rolling forward unless it has reverse thrusters

It has flown at 30 knots backwards, I imagine that would help slow it down if the pilot finds the brakes failed...


It will be hey oh shit moment it will be easier to increase power with forward motion then to slowing down and go around drop stores or fuel then come in for a VL

Little J
Member
Posts: 484
Joined: 02 May 2015, 14:35
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby Little J » 16 Oct 2018, 00:46

Scimitar54 wrote:They will not be closing on each other, the aircraft will need to be travelling 30-40mph faster (relative to the Carrier) and if the carrier is "underway" at say 20-25 Knots, then I think my figure is more likely to be closer to the mark.

So you've just agreed with me??? SRVL @58 Knots, with QE doing (you say) 20 Knots means that the plane is traveling at 38 Knots (43mph) faster relative to the Carrier.
Anyway I've been up since 05.30 it's now 00.45 night all.

Enigmatically
Member
Posts: 251
Joined: 04 May 2015, 19:00

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby Enigmatically » 16 Oct 2018, 06:38

Ron5 wrote:
Enigmatically wrote:
Ron5 wrote:

Twin Islands is a solution for having two large gas turbines located apart from each other. It has zero other merits and many demerits.

That was why it was first thought of. But it is not its only advantage. Far from it

Ron5 wrote:


SRVL re-introduces to the the RN the bolter or "go around".

No it doesn't. This is not like an arrestor laning


1. So try and list a couple. You'll be stretching because there aren't any. Takes away deck space for no gain.

2. Bollox. Go read what the landing office said.

Survivability
EMC
There are others, but you said a couple

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 8001
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 16 Oct 2018, 06:52

Errr:

Digger22
Member
Posts: 185
Joined: 27 May 2015, 16:47
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby Digger22 » 16 Oct 2018, 12:11

Good to see its not just USN that protect and therefore value their high end assets!
QE without a layered ability to defend itself with our reducing escort capability is another short sighted own goal. The kind of thing we did before the Falklands, and now apparently.

downsizer
Member
Posts: 714
Joined: 02 May 2015, 08:03

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby downsizer » 16 Oct 2018, 12:22

Enigmatically wrote:[quote="Ron5"][quote="Enigmatically"][quote="Ron5"]

Twin Islands is a solution for having two large gas turbines located apart from each other. It has zero other merits and many demerits.

That was why it was first thought of. But it is not its only advantage. Far from it

[quote="Ron5"]


SRVL re-introduces to the the RN the bolter or "go around".[/quote]
No it doesn't. This is not like an arrestor laning[/quote]

1. So try and list a couple. You'll be stretching because there aren't any. Takes away deck space for no gain.

2. Bollox. Go read what the landing office said.[/quote]
Survivability
EMC
There are others, but you said a couple[/quote]

What are they.

Genuinely interested as opposed to trolling.

Online
Caribbean
Senior Member
Posts: 1160
Joined: 09 Jan 2016, 19:08
Location: England

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby Caribbean » 16 Oct 2018, 12:53

The one usually quoted is that the bridge and flyco can be optimally sited for their respective functions
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 4659
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
Location: England

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby SKB » 16 Oct 2018, 13:28

And the two funnels spaced wide apart allows the exhaust heat to be more widely dispersed. One big funnel on a single island would create one big 'hot spot'.

User avatar
RichardIC
Member
Posts: 364
Joined: 10 May 2015, 16:59
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby RichardIC » 16 Oct 2018, 17:54

Little J wrote:So you've just agreed with me??? SRVL @58 Knots, with QE doing (you say) 20 Knots means that the plane is traveling at 38 Knots (43mph) faster relative to the Carrier.


https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/01/18/f35_uk_test_pilot_interview_sim_flight/

"It's a 35-knot overtaking speed at a seven-degree angle relative to the boat... You're literally coming down at the perfect speed and the perfect angle."

And in other developments

http://www.navair.navy.mil/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.NAVAIRNewsStory&id=6947

I will have the honor of conducting the first SRVL at sea for the U.S. military, so I’m excited; it’s what we all join up for. This is truly experimental test flying.”

Enigmatically
Member
Posts: 251
Joined: 04 May 2015, 19:00

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby Enigmatically » 16 Oct 2018, 18:07

Caribbean wrote:The one usually quoted is that the bridge and flyco can be optimally sited for their respective functions


That indeed would have been the next one I would have mentioned.

But , what have the twin islands ever done for us?
Optimal siting of bridge and flyco Reg.
Well obviously optimal siting of bridge and flyco., that goes without saying
Easier construction (you can lift islands that size on Goliath)

All right, apart from the shorter exhaust routes, EMC, survivability, Optimal siting of bridge and flyco, easier construction, what have the twin islands ever done for us?
Separated access routes

etc

seaspear
Senior Member
Posts: 1169
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 20:16
Location: Australia

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby seaspear » 17 Oct 2018, 11:01

A consideration of respective design differences between U.S.N carriers and the U.k class are the differences in conning, consider the difference between bow and bridge on both vessel types and the ability to gauge areas in front of vessels for navigation , line of sight etc.

User avatar
The Armchair Soldier
Site Admin
Posts: 1433
Joined: 29 Apr 2015, 08:31
Location: United Kingdom
Contact:

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby The Armchair Soldier » 17 Oct 2018, 11:47

Deleted the off-topic / shit-posts. Admin punishments will be issued if it occurs again.

User avatar
The Armchair Soldier
Site Admin
Posts: 1433
Joined: 29 Apr 2015, 08:31
Location: United Kingdom
Contact:

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

Postby The Armchair Soldier » 17 Oct 2018, 17:00

HMS PRINCE OF WALES (16 October 2018)
Image
Credit to Dave Cullen Photography 2018


Return to “Royal Navy”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: jimthelad, pbs, RB211, silabario and 1 guest